Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Did John really baptise Jesus?? | Bible general Archive 4 | ariel levin | 223514 | ||
Shalom Doc, Circumcision was an external sign on the flesh only and also done without the person's desire for it to be done. For that reason, you should not compare it with baptism, which is done at a person's request. Mikveh was indeed (and still is) performed by a person when they go through teshuvah. That is what John was calling Israel to do, to turn away from their own ways and come back to faith in the God of Israel. Here I'm a little shakey but it seems to me that John could not have been baptising in the Name prior to Messiah coming to him because until that time the "anointing" for His ministry had not yet come on Him permanently, so the "name" would not have had any power, nor had he purged mankind of sins, died and risen again and ascended to the Father. (Where I'm shakey is I'm not sure the people were being baptised in the name at all while He was still here on earth, cos like you said, it's symbolic of becoming One with Him in His death and resurrection?) |
||||||
2 | Did John really baptise Jesus?? | Bible general Archive 4 | DocTrinsograce | 223516 | ||
Dear ariel, See the following chapter entitled: "The reasons why Christian Baptism is not founded on, and taken from, the pretended Jewish Baptism of Israelites and proselytes" by John Gill. http://www.pbministries.org/books/gill/Practical_Divinity/Book_5/book5_05.htm Study takes effort. I apologize, but I do not have the time to predigest Gill. Suffice it to say that his evaluation of the subject stands the test of time by orthodox Christianity. Certainly, at least, in reformed orthodoxy. In Him, Doc |
||||||
3 | Did John really baptise Jesus?? | Bible general Archive 4 | ariel levin | 223517 | ||
Doc, Somewhere along the way we lost communication. I never said that mikveh and baptism are the same. I agree that baptism is symbolic of seeing ourselves in Messiah's death, burial, resurrection, and for that reason I believe that the "baptism" John was doing was a mikveh associated with teshuvah - changing one's direction, way of living, thinking. We're talking about a Jew doing a Jewish ritual to/with Jews. How could he have baptised into something that hadn't happened yet? I simply stated that the mikveh wasn't JUST for repentance of sins. It could have been done for Messiah as He was leaving one lifestyle behind (that of son, brother and carpenter) for another (His public ministry), Just because He was among a group of people who were turning back to God doens't mean that that has to be the reason He was there. |
||||||